[...]rs*
◦*emotional experience: with theater actors, who know about creating, discriminating, disclosing, and sharing emotional experiences*

***from whom should we inherit our practices, and how?***

learning from Despret's *anachronism* (her field philosophy)
اشتباه در ترتیب حقیقی وقایع

(heritage of Socrates) form of epistemic and ethical bifurcation ==> search for hidden causes (underlying the conduct of actors)
Socrates's “you think you know, but actually, you don't know and you don't think” ==created==> ***[1]a device that inhabits thinking and produced only mental paralysis***

--✕--> (Despret:) investigators rarely ask the question of how the people they interview might be interested in the questions addressed to them

*relevance = adventure*
there are many examples of how a piece of abstract knowledge that looked like devoid of any imaginable consequences came to matter (acquired an importance nobody would contest)
-relevance may be lost in translation
*ecology of dynamic and fragile patterns of relevance, of modes of mattering for oneself and for others (Savransky)
[*]relevance: a sense that there is value beyond ourselves (something that is not ourselves, matters) --Stengers--> (daring to connect the) speculative + ethical + practical
(risk of) to renounce *knowledge as a right* + embrace *knowledge's achievement as an event*


[title]
(ego engineering)


***[2]device of anonymity (“to protect people”) ==> distributes expertise, and builds induces performs an asymmetry of roles
•the imperative of deontology
•(can be) a regime of insult

“you, the refugees” --> an anonymous mass marked with **an identity that they had not chosen, and from which they cannot invent themselves**

risk of disclosing
risk of separating
risk of isolating
risk of making people talk while silencing
risk of stealing the words
risk of of drawing the words out from the speaker
risk of retying the secret to its etymology [secretus: to separate, to isolate]


(what we like to think about in apass) to reflect on what anonymity can produce in other research situations
[instead of asking “what the body does/produces?” =/= what Sina's body does for the spider in his room? what Ninja Turtles body does for Iron Man? what anonymous refugee body does for Xiri? what Jane Fonda body does for Laura? etc.]

***anonymity ==> identity***
(the position of “subject” in an investigation is created by erasing the name)
•“feel free to say anything you want” or “speak without fear" = your words will have no consequences
•they are always at risk of putting people in situations where they are unlikely to be interesting & unlikely to be interested

Despret's interview where an exchange really meant something =/= Mette's notion of nothing means anymore except the absurd gesture that announces meaninglessness of itself


inquiry = experience & experimentation, *testing & putting into continuity an ensemble of experiences*
Kimiavi in his film The Garden of Stones, his subject by the very fact that they are now part of the conditions of the environment in relation to which investigator develops skills, desires, knowledge or science
|
*inquiry: set of transformations that the very process of inquiry imposes, concrete and existential transformations for the objects studied just as much as the inquiring subject --> (Kimiavi's) logic of creative experimentation =/= logic of logic of discovery
|
*creative dimension (of every fieldwork):
•(it may) take the form of a device that sparks the creation of thoughts
•(it may) transform the relationship between the enquirer and the one she is addressing
•(it may) disclose some dimensions of the situation that were not visible or felt
•(it may) completely redefine what people actually docile
•


positivist sociological approach: to discover a reality already given, already stabilized + procedures asserting this stability + questions wanting to be neutral + a large and distributed sample + a modest investigator: who disappears behind the strength of the data (Haraway)


[*]inquiry: studies what it creates while studying it, and the changes it provokes (<-- we know this in art, @apass)

-can i no longer develop knowledge behind the back of those that i have questioned (my mother...)?

apass, #feedback
it is up to them to make the connection between what they think and what determines their particular way of thinking


summoning =/= mimesis (@Marialena)


@Pierre (from) critical analysis --to--> pragmatism
***we do not think or act “because” of social determination, but rather “with” them*** ~= better Cinderella (learning pragmatism from Cinderella: how to think and act with the evil sisters?)


amateur: the one who develops an expertise, a love, a taste [--Stengers--> dare to taste =/= dare to know]
Leibniz addressed his inquiries to the ones who know, because they have cultivated a particular relationship (of the amateur) with the very issue he wanted to learn about (=/= to address inquiries to the ones who know by virtue of being a mere authority)
•Leibniz proposed that woman should be addressed about the most important problem, that of the love (appropriate to give God) [...] because they are competent in the matter
•Leibniz = the master of abstraction --made--> [*]abstraction = a politeness of thought**♥, [*]politeness = a constraint on creation**
•****(why ask women about love? because) [*]woman: the ones who refuse letting a duty to ‘speak truth’****
--> a real interest in thinking about and with love (=/= “school of love”)

when you do *field philosophy* --Despret--> [*]field: a field-to-be, a milieu, a collective, a situation =/= field as something that preexists our inquiry

(how in apass i did field philosophy and field inquiry --> i made many times) situation-becoming-a-field (where you can learn something) needed:
•imagination
•tact
•daring
•opportunism
•humour
•

Despret > Claverie on pilgrimage with the Virgin of Medjugorje
she offered to those whom she addressed the most unexpected mode of response
she became interested in the very sophisticated way they think
(=/= social scientist's need to determinate the causes of something [designates it as an anomaly ==> impoverishing the object of study] --> asking “why people believe?” or “how can we explain such an odd thing as people believing in a supernatural being?”)
(she explored and learned with people how they think -->) ****how they take care of what matters for them with thoughts**** --> takes the form (in the pilgrims experience) of [*]hesitation: a sign that identifies that thought is occuring & this thought is taking care of something that matters [---> go to Attar Tazkirat al-Awliya]
forms of hesitation:
•openly contradictory alteration of positions
•a critical position (the apparition is not there)
•a position of belief
•using semantics or syntactic devices that introduce ambivalence
--> Claverie learns to hesitate with them
--Stengers--> ecological practice: a practice that takes into account the fact that the inquiry participates in the ‘milieu’ of those it addresses --> *the practicioner is herself taking care of what matters with thoughts and learns to create (what Despret would call) the relevant *milieu of thought*



Matrix world: “consumer victim =/= resistant hacker fighter” and nothing else

if you are a student of ghosts --> you are competent in sensing the taste of ghosts

{ancestors ate too much salt ==> descendants desire water}--> *intersubjective nature of remembering*
-[Despret > Kwon] true human desires are not those of an isolated individual. it is the individual who feels the desire, whereas the origin of the desirem, like the spirit's phantom salt, may be with someone else, for it is in the presence of this other that the water becomes salty --> ***the desire to remember can be a desire that rises somewhere between the past and the present***
-agencement: the act of commemoration responds to a desire, so one cannot choose whether it emanates from the one who is remembered or the one who takes charge of remembering --> the desire to be remembered & the desire to remember hold together [[...]